> "appears to have found that that the AI/ML organization built at Apple struggled to manifest its work into successful product wins despite the massive financial investment"

I would contest this statement very vigorously. Siri has been a disappointment but nearly every single Apple product has a load-bearing reliance on an AI/ML feature.

I'm continually frustrated by the (relatively recent, since LLMs) tic where just because a ML model isn't conversing with you or otherwise making its presence impossible to ignore, that it isn't delivering a massive amount of value. It is frustrating from laypeople, it is extra frustrating from industry insiders.

Just a few examples off the top of my head:

- AirPods with ANC and spatial audio. Both headline features of these products that are 100% AI/ML.

- Watch with heart arrhythmia detection, automatic workout detection, fall detection, etc. All are headline features (some literally life-saving) and are 100% AI/ML.

- iPhones have high-profile features that are 100% AI/ML: automatic car crash detection. Others are more subtle but IMO substantial differentiators - such as automatic image enhancements out-of-camera.

Again, I know in the age of ChatGPT we seem to have twisted ideas of what ML is, but "AI/ML" is not synonymous with LLM.